[PATCH v1 18/43] x86: pinctrl: Update comment for intel_pinctrl_get_pad()

[Bin Meng]

Hi Simon,

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 8:46 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Bin,
>
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 at 00:43, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 11:58 AM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add information about what is returned on error.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > ---
> > >
> > >  arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pinctrl.h | 1 +
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pinctrl.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pinctrl.h
> > > index f39ebde539..982b2514a0 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pinctrl.h
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pinctrl.h
> > > @@ -300,6 +300,7 @@ u32 intel_pinctrl_get_config_reg(struct udevice *dev, uint offset);
> > >   * @pad: Pad to check
> > >   * @devp: Returns pinctrl device containing that pad
> > >   * @offsetp: Returns offset of pad within that pinctrl device
> > > + * @return 0 if OK, -ENOTBLK if pad number is invalid
> >
> > It's weird that ENOTBLK is used for a pinctrl.
> >
>
> Yes. I want it to be very distinctive since it is passed through many
> functions. Can you suggest a better value?

How about -EINVAL?

Regards,
Bin